If a member makes valuable contributions they can come out of the "newly registered members" group quite quickly.

If a member consistently acts like an ass, they can find themselves back in the group quite quickly. This allows us to minimise the negative impact of the member on the rest of the members, makes life easier for us as moderators and reduces "noise".

When you read the discussions on the board, these are the result of filtering. If you were privy to what does not make it to public view, you would have severe doubts about the mental health of DW members.

"My religion is not deceiving myself."Jetsun Milarepa 1052-1135 CE

"Butchers, prostitutes, those guilty of the five most heinous crimes, outcasts, the underprivileged: all are utterly the substance of existence and nothing other than total bliss."The Supreme Source - The Kunjed Gyalpo
The Fundamental Tantra of Dzogchen Semde

...
When you read the discussions on the board these are the result of filtering. If you were privy to what does not make it to public view, you would have severe doubts about the mental health of DW members.

I have decided to stick with love.
Hate is too great a burden to bear.
- Martin Luther King, Jr. -

If you were privy to what does not make it to public view, you would have severe doubts about the mental health of DW members.

Do you have a professional credential to diagnose or question someone's mental health? (In the U.S., for example, MH professionals don't make diagnoses, or even hypotheses, without in-person interviewing. (There is inevitable criticism if they try.) Whether you do or not, surely, there must be a gentle and inoffensive way to deal with, and characterize, the human, saṃsāric manifestations of DW members. When you state that someone may be mentally unhealthy, is that just personal opinion, or is it an act of administration/moderation infused with professional psychological insight?

Do you routinely, professionally, try to help other members, provide them editorial assistance about, for instance, a comment that would otherwise "not make it to public view"? Or would you consider that a waste of your time?

We can all look up the required ToS for members. Do moderators have only an equivalent standard, as stated therein, or also a more specific guideline that addresses their specialized and formal responsibilities?

If your service to members is in any way predicated on professional expertise, and your comment is not just an offhand pejorative, please let us, the DW members, know.

Blowing off any or all of these five questions would be an acceptable answer . . . Thank you in advance for your kind attention.

Locking this, as while questions are fine, threads turning into complaint fests about moderation are not. If a member has a specific complaint they can bring it up to the mod team formally through PM, etc.

Public "call out" threads of moderation have a terrible history here, and most forums, and therefore are discouraged.

"it must be coming from the mouthy mastermind of raunchy rapper, Johnny Dangerous”